This file is provided for reference purposes only. It was current when produced, but is no longer maintained and may now be outdated. Please select www.ovc.gov to access current information.

Chapter 17The News Media's Coverage of

Crime and Victimization

Abstract

The news media wield a "double-edged sword" in their coverage of crime and victimization
relevant to the "public's right to know" versus "the victim's right to privacy." Victim service
providers play crucial roles in protecting victims' privacy rights, and helping victims cope with
media coverage immediately following a crime, during the trial, and following verdicts.
Advocates must possess knowledge of who the media are, how they operate, and victims'
needs pertinent to dealing with the media.

Learning Objectives

Upon completion of this chapter, students will understand the following concepts:

The impact of news reporting on crime.

The influence of the news media on criminal justice, juvenile justice, and victim services
policies and practices.

Advocating for victims in high-profile cases.

First Amendment issues and precedents relevant to victim privacy.

Major concerns of victims and service providers when dealing with the media and
guidelines for victims who choose to deal with the media.

The role and responsibilities of the victim advocate in helping victims deal with the news
media.

Significant issues for the media and the courts.

The media perspective of crime and victimization.

Impact of News Media Reporting on Crime

Crime in America is big news that is of significant concern to the American public. In a 1997
national survey conducted by the Roper Center in conjunction with the Newseum of Arlington,
Virginia, 95% of 1,500 respondents said "they want to know about crime," a higher response
rate than for any other topic, including local news, the environment, and world news (Parade
Magazine 1997, 4).

Numerous studies of American news media have examined the media's coverage of crime in
comparison with actual crime rates. A 1996 U.S. News & World Report article reported that
"the number of crime stories on the network evening news in 1995 was quadruple the 1991
total. Last year (1995), the three networks ran 2,574 stories about domestic crime, more than
the combined number of stories on the budget, Bosnia and the presidential campaign. Even
excluding stories about the O. J. Simpson trial, the networks aired 375 stories on murder in
1995, more than four times the 1990 total, when the homicide rate was higher." Such news
reporting came at a time when the overall crime rate had been significantly dropping. U.S.
News & World Report concluded that ". . . if there is no new crime wave in the real world,
there is one on TV news."

Media reporting of crime and victimization, in both print and broadcast formats, has far-reaching effects on a number of populations and special interests:

THE CRIMINAL AND JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM

Coverage of criminal and juvenile justice system activities offers citizens an overview of the
entire justice process, from law enforcement to prosecution through probation, parole, and
corrections. The news media's examination of individual cases has resulted in groundswells of
public opinion and action that have, in many cases, ultimately changed the way the justice
system operates. In addition, the emergence of cameras in the courtroom and the Court TV
network have expanded the American public's knowledge of the myriad intricacies that
comprise our justice system.

The criminal and juvenile justice systems are also affected by their attempts to preserve the
sanctity of criminal cases and, in some cases, protect victims' privacy. The espoused theory of
the "public's right to know" often puts the media in direct conflict with system officials who
believe that case confidentiality is essential to obtaining criminal convictions.

THE MEDIA PROFESSION

Over the past decade, coverage of crime and victimization has drastically changed. For
example, in 1985, footage of bodies and/or body bags on national networks elicited organized
outcries from victim advocates across the nation. Today, such footage is commonplace. The
volatile issue of identifying victims of sexual assault in the media has been debated and
analyzed from both victim advocacy and First Amendment perspectives, with little consensus
from either side of the argument.

However, the past fifteen years have also witnessed an increase in media professionals who
seek sensitivity training from crime victims and advocates so that they can accurately cover
crime stories with the least amount of trauma to the victim. Today, crime victims and service
providers offer training programs to newsrooms, professional journalism associations, and
university-level journalism classes about media sensitivity in addressing violence and
victimization.

Journalists who cover crime beats are also affected by the scope and demands of their jobs.
Those who cover the horror and degradation of violence on a regular basis have few outlets for
the personal trauma they must endure. As such, there is high demand for a protocol to
"debrief" journalists whose assignments include regular coverage of violence.

VICTIM SERVICE PROVIDERS

The increase in the news media's coverage of crime and victimization has resulted in a very
specialized discipline within the field of victim services: advocating for crime victims whose
cases are covered by the news media. Training programs to help service providers better work
with the news media who cover crime and victimization, as well as guidelines in media
relations that help them enhance their professional relationships with the news media, are
regularly offered at training conferences and as a component of victim service professional
education.

CRIME VICTIMS

The constituency most affected by the news media's coverage of violence and victimization is
crime victims. While sensitive coverage of victim's cases can be helpful and, in some cases,
even healing, media coverage that is sometimes viewed as insensitive, voyeuristic, and
uncaring can compound victims' emotional and psychological suffering.

Most crime victims have never before dealt with the news media. They are thrust, often
unwillingly, into a limelight they do not seek and do not enjoy solely because of the crimes
committed against them. Many victims describe the initial assault from the perpetrator, a
secondary assault from the criminal justice system, and a tertiary assault at the hands of the
news media. As ABC News and Political Analyst Jeff Greenfield explained in 1986, "What
weighs in the scale is not simply the desire of a victim for privacy . . . but the prospect of
further victimization beyond the involuntary thrust into the public arena. And this is
something that the journalism community must begin to consider in its daily business."

THE AMERICAN PUBLIC

The media play a significant role in public safety by keeping citizens apprised of--

increases and decreases in crime.

trends in violence and victimization (that are specific to national, state, local, and even
neighborhood targeted audiences).

In the previously cited Newseum/Roper Group poll (Parade Magazine 1997, 4), the American
public offered some excellent insights and opinions about news reporting:

82% think reporters are insensitive to people's pain when covering disasters and accidents.

64% think the news is too sensationalized.

64% think reporters spend too much time offering their own opinions.

63% think the news is too manipulated by special interests.

60% think reporters too often quote sources whose names are not given in news stories.

52% think the news is too biased.

46% think the news is too negative.

Many of these concerns have been identified in the past by crime victims and those who serve
them. Parade Magazine highlighted similar concerns by leading American journalists. For
example, Tom Brokaw, anchor of NBC Nightly News, said: "Coverage of big stories can give
the impression of a feeding frenzy. People feel bombarded."

The Media and Its Influence on Criminal/Juvenile Justice

and Victims' Rights Policies and Programs

The media's significant focus on high-profile crimes, as well as societal ills related to crime
and victimization, have wielded considerable influence, both positive and negative, on policies
and programs relevant to criminal justice, juvenile justice, and victims' rights and services.
News coverage ranging from a single report to more widespread coverage of key issues has
profoundly affected the delivery of justice and victim services.

For example, the news media played a significant role in the myriad juvenile justice reforms
that occurred throughout the 1990s. The publicity surrounding increases in juvenile violent
crime, as well as the cloak of secrecy that shrouded America's juvenile justice system, led to
reforms relevant to both offender confidentiality and increased victim involvement in juvenile
court proceedings. Attention to hate crimes, including the award-winning series in USA Today
by reporter Gary Fields about the church burnings in the South, provided impetus to the U.S.
Department of Justice's increased collaborative efforts on prevention and resolution of these
shocking offenses. Reforms in child welfare systems and services in numerous states followed
extensive news reports of too many children who were falling through the cracks of systems
that should be designed to protect them.

Many state laws and agency policies relevant to crime victims have been passed or
strengthened as a result of media exposure. In these instances, "the power of the personal
story" drove public policy and gave impetus to new and important sub-disciplines of the
victims' rights field:

In the early days of Mothers Against Drunk Driving, the founders of MADD effectively
utilized the media to draw attention to a criminal act--driving under the influence (DUI) of
alcohol and other drugs--that was not even considered a crime. As family members around
the nation spoke publicly in a unified manner for the first time about the devastating effects
of DUI offenses, the results changed federal, state, and local policies and continue to do so
today.

The courage of John Walsh and other parents, whose children were abducted, contributed to
federal and state laws in the 1980s and beyond in addressing the tragedy of missing
children. Parents' efforts were institutionalized by the federal government in 1984 with the
creation of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.

Despite her pleas for notification of any change in his custodial status, Lisa Bianco was
murdered by her ex-husband while he was on furlough from the Indiana Department of
Corrections. Her death resulted in the passage of corrections-based victim notification laws
in all fifty states and the District of Columbia. Local and national media attention on this
tragedy was instrumental in the positive public policy changes that resulted.

The brutal abduction, rape, and murder of Megan Kanka in July 1994 and ensuing media
exposure about the confidentiality of sex offenders under community supervision led to the
passage of "Megan's Laws" at the federal level and in most states, which require sex
offender registries and the provision of information to communities about the location of sex
offenders in their midst.

When mothers of victims murdered in gang violence were interviewed for a broadcast series
by an independent television station in Los Angeles, their pleas for justice and
understanding contributed to the U.S. Department of Justice, Office for Victims of Crime
"Special Report on Victims of Gang Violence" published in 1996.

The media also provide forums for important dialogue among seemingly disparate groups. For
example, widespread attention on the use of DNA testing to clear unsolved criminal cases also
focused on how DNA has been instrumental in freeing inmates who were wrongly convicted.
One poignant program brought together a sexual assault victim with the man who was freed
from prison for that assault through new DNA evidence. In another instance, media attention
on the lack of funding for public defense encouraged a victim advocate to address this issue at
a national conference of defense attorneys from the victims' perspective--lack of funding for
public defense of indigent defendants leads to delays that can be traumatic for victims.

The following are examples where media have also had a powerful influence on improving
programs and services for victims of crime:

Many victim service programs solicit volunteers through feature articles and programs in
the local media and through news columns that promote volunteer activities.

When an innovative approach to victim assistance is publicized through national or local
media, it often leads to requests for information that contribute to the replication of
promising practices or policies.

Many victims, who choose not to report crime, learn about community-based victim service
programs available to assist them through news reports.

The Internet's Impact on Victims' Rights and Services

The most rapidly growing form of media in the world today is the World Wide Web. The
global "virtual network" that has resulted holds important implications for crime victims and
those who serve them.

Thousands of Web sites now offer information and referral services for victims of crime and
victim service providers. Direct services are rapidly becoming available, as evidenced by the
free confidential counseling offered on-line to sexual assault victims by the Brazos Rape Crisis
Center in Texas. Listservs link together victim advocates and allied professionals who share
interest in specific victim- and justice-related topics, simplifying the exchange of information
and ideas. In some states, victim compensation claims and agency reports are filed
electronically with the compensation authority.

The News Media and High Profile Cases

In high profile cases, where either the victim or the alleged or convicted offender is a well-known person, the victim is often thrust unwillingly into an excessive and excruciating
limelight that he or she neither asked for, nor desires. The "pack mentality" that can result
from a combination of mainstream and tabloid media competing for the same scoops, under the
same deadlines, can be devastating to victims.

Two victim advocates who joined the rest of the nation in watching the now infamous freeway
chase that followed the double murders in Brentwood, California in 1995 shared their
perspectives:

We were working on a project in Cheyenne, Wyoming, and had just begun relaxing in our hotel room
when all the major networks began broadcasting a minute-by-minute, up-close-and-personal view of the
freeway chase of the Ford Bronco--on the heels of days of news media focus on the alleged defendant in
the case. We were appalled at the circus atmosphere surrounding this bizarre coverage--people standing
by I-405 urging the fleeing alleged perpetrator to "go...go...go...."

Cognizant of the fact that there were two murder victims, as well as two families that were enduring the
greatest possible trauma and grief, we decided we could not just stand by idle and let this offensive
charade continue. In less than half an hour, we typed out a press release entitled simply "Remember the
Victims." It focused solely on the victim perspective of this horrible tragedy and that, in the absolute
craziness of the news media in covering the freeway exploits, there were tremendous pain and suffering
that were subsequently going on.

After begging the hotel management to let us fax our press release to major media outlets, we contacted a
number of victim advocates who could present the victim perspective, as we were in a training session for
the next two days. The results were incredible--we fielded a dozen calls that night, and into the wee
morning hours, requesting a spokesperson "who could express the voice of the victim."

While this effort was entirely spontaneous and propelled by frustration, the end result was very positive.
It showed that every story has two sides, and every victim advocate has both the opportunity and
obligation to speak out on behalf of victims everywhere.

In high profile cases, every aspect of victim advocacy demands a greater intensity to protect
the victim's interest and privacy. Such cases require close coordination among key justice
officials and professionals or volunteers who are working with the victim. It is essential to
present the victim's aspect of a case in a manner that is respectful, a goal that can be difficult
to achieve when the limelight is so intense.

THE COLORADO/OKLAHOMA RESOURCE COUNCIL MEDIA CONSORTIUM

When the trial for the Oklahoma City bombing and murders at the Murrah federal building
changed venue to Denver, Colorado, a community-based group was established to provide
services to the victims and survivors while they were in Denver for the trials. The goal of the
Colorado/Oklahoma Resource Council (CORC) was to minimize re-traumatization of victims
from Oklahoma City who were displaced during the judicial process.

Recognizing the potential for a "media circus" surrounding the trials, which were the most
covered news events since the murder of John F. Kennedy in 1963, CORC created a Media
Consortium in partnership with the Denver city government, the federal government, the
courts, and the community. The three goals of the Media Consortium were as follows:

Support the federal court, recognizing that the business of the court is justice, not the
media.

Address community concerns, in particular the powerful presence of the news media.

Treat victims and witnesses with dignity and respect.

The strength of the Media Consortium offered benefits for the news media, courts, community,
and, perhaps most important, the victims. The Consortium developed a credentialing process
for journalists who wished to attend the trial, which had limited seats for the news media. It
worked closely with the courts to identify space for news media and their equipment and to
secure proper permits. Pool coverage was also coordinated by the Consortium so that all
reporters had access to information from the courtroom each day, regardless of whether they
were on-site. Perhaps most important, the Consortium promoted self-policing control and
accountability among journalists.

By establishing both formal and informal rules, the Consortium contributed greatly to victim
sensitivity and victim privacy. The pool coverage helped victims avoid a "mob mentality"
among journalists. Guidelines for dealing with the news media were provided to the victims,
and rules were established for victim service providers that ensured the veracity of their
interactions with journalists, and that permission to speak on behalf of specific victims was
always obtained.

The CORC Media Consortium holds great promise for other communities that are faced with a
high-profile criminal case. CORC is developing a comprehensive training and technical
assistance package that will help other communities plan for, and be prepared to implement, a
coordinated approach to dealing with the news media in a positive, proactive manner, while
protecting both the privacy of the victims and the sanctity of the high-profile case.

The Public's Right to Know Versus the Victim's Right to Privacy

The question of where a society's right to know ends and an individual's right to privacy
begins is one of journalism's thorniest ethical dilemmas (Thomason and Babbili 1988).

This double-edged sword has serious implications for victims and those who serve them.
While the legal aspects relevant to the First Amendment are quite clear, ethical considerations
that take into account the traumatic nature of victimization and related news coverage are much
more complex.

There have been two precedent-setting decisions handed down by the U.S. Supreme Court
relevant to the privacy rights of crime victims.

In Florida Star v. B.J.F., a weekly newspaper in Jacksonville published a news article that
identified the name of a sexual assault victim, violating its own policy of protecting the privacy
of rape victims. The resulting appeals and ultimate Supreme Court decision rendered in 1989
were summarized in a 1990 Mercer Law Review article:

In Florida Star v. B.J.F., the Supreme Court invalidated a Florida statute proscribing the newspaper
publication of the identity of sexual assault victims. In making its determination, the Court balanced the
state interest of protecting the privacy of assault victims against the first amendment concerns of the free
press. The Court did not focus on the privacy right of the plaintiff as much as it considered the inability
of the statute to achieve its desired goal. Accordingly, the Supreme Court found the Florida statute
unconstitutional primarily because of its failure to protect the privacy of assault victims effectively without
an impermissible intrusion on the first amendment freedom of the press (Hughes 1990).

The constitutionality of a Georgia law that prohibited the identification of rape victims by the
news media was called into question in a case involving a television station's reporting of the
name of a deceased rape victim. When Cox Broadcasting Corporation v. Cohn (1975) was
appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, Justice White noted in the affirming opinion that the
"commission of crime, prosecutions resulting from it, and judicial proceedings arising from
the prosecutions . . . are without question events of legitimate concern to the public and
consequently fall within the responsibility of the press to report the operations of government"
(p. 493).

There are several arguments adopted by journalists in support of identifying victims of crime
and, in particular, victims of sexual assault and rape. First, the public's right to know any
information that is part of public record (i.e., law enforcement or court documents) is
frequently cited. Next, some journalists believe that, in the name of fairness and equity, the
victim's identity should not be protected when the name of the alleged assailant is published or
broadcast, particularly when the defendant is found not guilty. Finally, some journalists
believe that identifying rape victims will somehow eliminate or reduce the stigma that is often
associated with sexual assault.

However, research clearly shows that crime victims, service providers, and American women
in general strongly support protecting the privacy of rape victims. Key findings from The
National Women's Study, as reported in "Rape in America: A Report to the Nation," include
the following:

84% of rape victims do not report to the police.

50% of rape victims would be "a lot more likely to report" to police if there was a law
prohibiting the news media from disclosing their name and address, with 16% indicating
they would be "somewhat more likely to report" rapes to the police.

86% of American women felt victims would be less likely to report rapes if they felt their
names would be disclosed by the news media.

Surveys of American newspaper editors have shown that most do not routinely publish the
names of rape victims. In 1982, Oukrop reported that 68% of the editors she surveyed
believed names of rape victims should not be published (p. 21). Winch (1991) surveyed
editors in 1990 and found that 9.6% said rape victims should never be named; 39.6% said they
should be named only with the victim's permission; and 43.6% said they should be named only
in exceptional cases.

Furthermore, more news media today are addressing the issue of rape than ever before. In
"Newspaper Coverage of Rape: Editors Still Reluctant to Name the Victim," the following
data were revealed:

The topic of rape coverage had been discussed in respondents' newsrooms, with 57.5%
noting that their paper had seriously re-examined policy on rape identification, and 55.2%
saying that they had re-examined policy on rape coverage in general.

More than 40% believed their own newspaper is more sensitive toward rape victims than
five years ago, and more than 50% said they believed newspapers as a whole are more
sensitive.

22.6% disagree with the idea that routine printing of the names of rape victims would
remove the stigma of rape.

Only 24.3% agreed that not printing names of rape victims was a violation of the public's
right to know.

However, the editors indicated that the decision to withhold a name should be the
newspaper's, not a result of legislation that keeps the name from the press. Almost three-fourths of the editors (71.8%) said those laws should be repealed because they violate the
First Amendment (Thomason and LaRocque 1994, 11-12).

Clearly, the correlation between rape victims' fear of being identified and the fact that only
16% of rapes are ever reported to police should be a driving force behind the protection of the
privacy rights of all sexual assault victims. While legislation mandating such protections has
been held unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court, the news media should adopt policies
that protect rape victims' right to privacy as a basic ethical premise of journalistic doctrine.

The Major Concerns of Crime Victims and Service Providers

In addition to privacy protections, the National Center for Victims of Crime has identified
fourteen significant concerns that crime victims and service providers have in regard to the
news media's coverage of crime and victimization (Seymour and Lowrance 1988, 5-7).

Interviewing at inappropriate times. "Inappropriate times" for interviewing victims include
immediately following a crime, at funerals, in hospital settings, and during trials when the
judge or prosecutor has issued a gag order to witnesses. It is during these periods that a
victim's trauma and distress tend to be extremely high; dealing with the news media can
create a secondary victimization that compounds the victim's tragedy caused by the violent
crime.

A 1992 study of homicide survivors found that 92% of respondents felt that "it is not
appropriate for a television news reporter and camera crew to approach a grieving
individual immediately following a death" (Fritz 1992, 91). The feelings of many victims
at the crisis stage following a crime were summed up by the mother of a murdered
daughter:

You're in such a state of shock, you're not thinking in terms of newspapers . . . You're not prepared
for this . . . I thought I'd come home by myself and cry my eyes out, but there already were 500
people waiting when I got home. We're not ready. We're numb. We don't know what's going on
(Grotta 1986, 10).

Using euphemisms to describe victims and offenders. Euphemisms are often utilized by
journalists and, in particular, newspaper headline writers to capture the essence of a violent
act in a brief, memorable manner. However, in doing so, the identity of the victim can be
demeaned and even lost. Most Americans remember the notorious "Preppie Murder" in
Central Park in the 1980s, but how many people can recall the name of the victim, Jennifer
Levin?

Glamorizing the offender. The following words were used at various times to describe a
well-known criminal: "handsome," "intelligent," "rape crisis center volunteer," and "law
school student." The man who was so described was Ted Bundy, one of our nation's worst
serial murderers. While such descriptions may be essential to a news story, what often adds
insult to the victim's injury is the lack of such detail in describing the victims of such
heinous criminals.

Exhibiting aggressive behavior toward victims, survivors, and their advocates. The
pressure to obtain a news story, often under a tight deadline, can lead some journalists to be
overly aggressive to victims, their loved ones, and victim service providers. A television
photographer illuminated this problem when he noted:

I think at times we don't take into consideration what these people have been through. There is pressure
there, someone breathing down your back to go out and get that story, get that interview. We should be
more sensitive to these people's feelings. Sometimes I think we're a bit too aggressive (Grotta 1986, 7).

Ignoring victims' and survivors' wishes. The issues of control and decision-making are
essential to a victim's reconstruction following a crime. Since victims do not choose to be
victimized, their ability to make decisions and have some degree of control over their lives
following a violent crime is very important. Crime victims' wishes relevant to the news
media's coverage of their cases should be respected and followed.

Filming and photographing scenes with bodies, body bags, and blood. Many victim service
professionals believe that the steady diet of gory crime scenes, often involving murdered
victims, body bags, and blood, portrayed in broadcast and print media contributes to
individual and collective desensitization to violence and the personal tragedy it wreaks on
victims and survivors of crime.

Repeatedly using crime scene footage as a "lead-in" to newscasts. When a broadcast
medium chooses to show crime footage as the "lead-in" prior to a newscast, it can re-victimize anybody who was involved in that specific crime. One victim told of watching the
evening news and seeing a body bag containing her husband:

There was no warning to the family that this was upcoming. You look up and there's his body.
That's offensive. You can't be any more offensive than that (Grotta 1986, 7).

Reporting hearsay. The "double-edged sword" wielded by the media who cover crime is
often evident when victims, their loved ones, and law enforcement officials refuse to be
interviewed for reasons including the need for privacy, or to preserve the sanctity of the
criminal investigation or case. In such cases, some media rely on interviews with third
parties, including neighbors and people who may, or may not, have known the victim, to
obtain details about the victim and/or alleged perpetrator. However, such hearsay
interviews often cannot be relied upon for accuracy and can invoke additional trauma for
victims.

Interfering in police investigations. The need for cooperation among law enforcement,
other criminal justice officials, and the news media is essential to criminal investigations
and prosecutions. Often, details that journalists consider key to a good story are also details
that must be kept confidential in order to successfully complete a criminal investigation.

Referring to drunk driving crashes as "accidents." The public awareness generated over the
past two decades by Mothers Against Drunk Driving, Remove Intoxicated Drivers, and
other victim advocacy organizations has successfully educated citizens about the dangers of
drinking, drugging, and driving. There is nothing "accidental" about a person who chooses
to drink and drive, resulting in a crime that injures or kills another human being. Many
journalists have begun referring to such tragedies as "crashes" or "crimes," which more
accurately describes the criminality of driving under the influence of alcohol or other drugs.

Failing to cover a crime at all. Societal biases in America are sometimes reflected in news
reporting. The length of news copy and scope of broadcast coverage tend to vary based
upon the victim's race, where they live, socioeconomic status, and other factors that have
nothing to do with the crime committed against them. These issues were elaborated upon in
an article by the associate editor of a large metropolitan daily newspaper:

When city editors get calls from the crime reporter, often the first question asked is "Where did it
happen?" The news team's reaction to the crime is often predicated on where the crime occurred. If
it's at one of the projects in predominantly black and Hispanic West Dallas, we call in a brief; if it's in
white, fashionable University Park, we roll a reporter or two. That attitude is unlikely to change
(Sotomayer 1987).

Such institutional biases can only be changed with continual training on cultural sensitivity,
particularly as it relates to the coverage of crime.

Identifying child victims. The criminal justice system goes to great length to protect the
privacy of child victims, recognizing that any public identification of children's emotional,
physical, or sexual assaults can have devastating consequences. The media should similarly
respect the privacy rights of child victims, and should avoid all reporting that in any way
contacts or identifies victims of child abuse. In cases of incest allegations or convictions,
journalists should not identify perpetrators if the child victim is in any way at risk of also
being identified.

Attempting to interview survivors of homicide victims prior to official death notifications by
law enforcement. In homicide cases, the news media should always ascertain whether or
not surviving family members of the victim have been notified of their loved one's murder.
One victim recalled driving his car on a Florida freeway and hearing a radio report of his
brother's brutal murder at the hands of a high-profile, and yet unidentified, killer. The
shock and grief associated with the news media's reporting of violent deaths prior to
sensitive death notification comprise a second tragic victimization that can easily be avoided
with communication and cooperation between law enforcement and the media.

Inaccurate reporting. Accurate media coverage of details of a crime, however minute, are
very important to crime victims and survivors. For example, inaccurately reporting of the
age of a homicide victim can have traumatic consequences on that victim's surviving family
members. Factual reporting of all details associated with a crime is critical not only to the
media's underlying philosophy of accuracy, but also to a victim's efforts to reconstruct his
or her life following a crime.

Guidelines for Victims Who Choose to Deal With the Media

A brochure published by the National Center for Victims of Crime in 1987 entitled Victims'
Rights and the Media offers valuable guidelines to crime victims whose cases are covered by
print and broadcast news media. While the "rights" enumerated in this brochure are not
mandated by statute or policy, they should be considered guiding principles provided by all
service providers to crime victims prior to dealing with the news media.

YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO:

1. Say "no" to an interview.

2. Select the spokesperson or advocate of your choice.

3. Select the time and location for media interviews.

4. Request a specific reporter.

5. Refuse an interview with a specific reporter even though you have granted interviews to
other reporters.

6. Say "no" to an interview even though you have previously granted interviews.

7. Release a written statement through a spokesperson in lieu of an interview.

8. Exclude children from interviews.

9. Refrain from answering any questions with which you are uncomfortable or that you feel
are inappropriate.

10. Know in advance the direction the story about your victimization is going to take.

11. Avoid a press conference atmosphere and speak to only one reporter at a time.

12. Demand a correction when inaccurate information is reported.

13. Ask that offensive photographs or visuals be omitted from broadcast or publication.

14. Conduct a television interview using a silhouette or a newspaper interview without having
your photograph taken.

15. Completely give your side of the story related to your victimization.

16. Refrain from answering reporters' questions during trial.

17. File a formal complaint against a journalist.

18. Grieve in privacy.

19. Suggest training about media and victims for print and electronic media in your
community (Seymour and Lowrance 1988, 7-10).

Guidelines for Television Talk Shows and Crime Victim Guests

In the past two decades, television talk shows have emerged as a powerful genre to address
various issues of importance to the public, including crime. While such programs can have a
powerful impact on promoting victims' rights and needs, they can also be traumatic to victim
guests whose cases are sensationalized, or who are treated in an insensitive manner.

Recognizing the need for accountability from television talk shows, the National Center for
Victims of Crime (NCVC 1994) developed guidelines for talk shows and crime victim guests
that promote victim sensitivity and reduce opportunities for "re-victimizing victims."

Television talk shows should use only those victims who have had the benefit of counseling
and guidance from a trained victim counselor, professional, or advocate.

Crime victims should not appear in the immediate wake of their victimization, particularly if
they have not had the advantage of counseling by professional victim advocates and service
providers.

Child victims should not be guests.

A professionally trained victim advocate or crisis counselor should be on hand at all times.

Crime victims should be treated with dignity and respect at all times.

Crime victims should always be fully informed about the format of the show; how their
story will be told; who else will appear (in person or otherwise such as from a remote
location); and what subjects will be discussed with each guest. Whenever possible, victims
should be provided with copies of the producer's notes on each guest.

If an offender (any offender) is to be physically present in the studio or elsewhere in the
facility, the victim should be given notice of the specific facts and asked what arrangements
can be made in the studio to make the victim feel comfortable and safe if he or she chooses
to be a guest. Every precaution should be taken to prevent the offender and the victim from
"crossing paths" before, during, and after the show.

Victims should be offered the opportunity to get comfortable with the set by allowing them
to arrive early, or even the day before the actual taping.

Victims should always have the right to view pictures, video/audio tapes, and graphic or
other depictions that will air as part of the show.

Victims should be informed in advance of the option to protect their anonymity by whatever
means are necessary such as silhouette screens, disguises, electronic voice alteration, pixel
and fog screening, etc.

When the victim desires, no information should be presented that would disclose the
location of their home, place of work, or whereabouts.

Victims should have the right to request that their show not air in certain markets if there
are safety concerns.

Victims should have the opportunity to request that disclosures which compromise their
anonymity or safety be edited from the broadcast program.

Victims should be informed of when the original show will air and when the show will be
re-broadcast.

Victims in the viewing audience may experience a crisis reaction while watching a show
about crime victimization experiences. It is strongly advised that producers provide a
disclaimer at the beginning of the show cautioning viewers of the content.

Code of Ethics for Victim Advocates in Dealing With the News

Media

In 1988, the National Center for Victims of Crime published a suggested code of ethics for
victim advocates in the media. With adherence to these recommended guidelines (which were
updated in 1995), victim advocates can ease the trauma of the news media's coverage of crime
and victims and, at the same time, assist the news media in their attempts to focus public
attention on crime in our nation:

I SHALL ALWAYS:

1. Honor the victim's wishes relevant to any news media coverage of their tragedy.

2. Protect the privacy of any victims who do not wish to have contact with the news media.

3. Provide victims with guidelines on how to deal with the news media.

4. Help victims, upon request, prepare for print or broadcast media interviews.

5. Inform victims that they have the right to refuse an interview with the media.

7. Review with reporters, producers, and talk show hosts exactly what questions they can and
cannot ask the victim.

8. Reserve the right to end any interview if the victim shows signs of trauma during the
course of an interview.

9. Discourage the participation of children in any interviews or talk shows.

I SHALL NEVER:

1. Force a victim into an interview against his or her wishes.

2. Provide any information about the victim without his or her explicit consent (Seymour and
Lowrance 1988, 15).

The Role and Responsibilities of the Victim Advocate

in Helping Victims Deal With the News Media

Advocacy for crime victims in the media has become a specialized discipline within the field of
victim advocacy. Victim service providers who assume this immense responsibility must do
the following:

Be knowledgeable about how the news media operate.

Be knowledgeable about victims' rights and issues in general, and about the specifics of the
victim and case at hand.

Develop solid relationships with news media professionals who are known to be sensitive to
crime victims and victims' rights issues.

Consider the needs and desires of the victims they represent, especially privacy concerns,

as foremost among their responsibilities.

Be sensitive to the specific needs of the victim and/or the victim's family and friends, as
well as to the parameters of the criminal investigation, criminal or juvenile justice system,
and criminal or juvenile case (when applicable).

Be available twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week for both the victim and the news
media.

Be aware of and prepared to protect victims' rights in the media.

ADVANCE PREPARATION

Victim service providers should have a roster of key media in their community that includes
contact name, address, telephone number, fax number, Web site address, and e-mail address.
A database that allows rapid distribution of information such as victim statements and press
releases via fax, mail, or the Internet is helpful.

To know which media professionals have provided thorough, sensitive coverage of victims'
cases, as well as those who have been less sensitive or intrusive, is helpful. If the victims asks
for recommendations on specific media who have contacted them, this type of background
information is useful.

HELPFUL TIPS

Be well-versed about victims' rights in the media.

Know all the facts of the case, including detailed, accurate information about the victim.

Always remember that a defendant is innocent until proven guilty, and is "alleged" to have
committed a crime prior to conviction.

Be aware that anything you or the victim say to the media may be used by the defense.

Be professional and courteous at all times.

VICTIM ADVOCACY

In some cases, the victim service provider will be directly contacted by the victim or a family
member or friend. In other cases, a telephone call to the victim, followed up with a personal
note that provides the service provider's/agency's contact information for support and services
(including media advocacy), is appropriate.

The role of the victim advocate in helping victims deal with the media may include the
following activities:

Determine if the victim wants to deal with the media and, if so, in what manner--lay
"ground rules" for the news media.

Provide to the news media the victim's wishes ("ground rules") both verbally and in
writing.

Provide victims with an answering machine if they do not have one that contains a message
concerning the victim's wishes for dealing with the media and others.

Explain how the media work and, in particular, how the media might cover the victim's
case.

Help the victim select a spokesperson, when applicable, and be prepared to fulfill this role
upon request from the victim.

Be prepared to develop a written statement, upon request from the victim, for dissemination
to the media. A double-spaced statement that includes the spokesperson's contact
information, limited to sixty seconds or less, is most appropriate.

Protect at all costs the privacy of sensitive victims such as sexual assault victims, children
and elderly victims, and victims with disabilities.

Provide the media with contact information for the spokesperson selected by the victim.

Coordinate interview guidelines and other release of information with the media throughout
the duration of the case.

Release only that information to the media that has been approved by the victim.

Remember that the media are visually oriented.

Provide copies of a photograph chosen by surviving family members in cases involving
deceased victims, with the original photograph returned promptly to the family.

Prior to the verdict, help the victim prepare two statements: one for a "guilty" verdict, and
one for a "not guilty" verdict.

Advise the victim that following a verdict, the news media will have access to persons who
had previously been silenced during court proceedings.

Be prepared to provide follow-up support and advocacy to victims following a verdict,
regardless of what that verdict is.

Maintain a log of media coverage of the case, including newspaper clippings, and
audio/video footage of interviews.

CASE COORDINATION

Determine key criminal or juvenile justice officials (such as the police public information
officer, prosecuting attorney, or victim/witness coordinator) with whom media outreach
should be coordinated.

Coordinate any release of information with key criminal or juvenile justice officials.

For cases involving trials or juvenile court hearings, determine a room in the courthouse
where the victim can be guaranteed privacy. Also, determine alternative routes for the
victim to enter and exit without being confronted by the media.

Always keep in mind that pretrial publicity can result in a change of venue.

Never speak about the case in any public situations and, in particular, anywhere in or
around the courthouse.

Coordinate victim privacy protection rules with the prosecutor and judge in cases involving
trials, especially in cases in which cameras are allowed in the courtroom.

Respect any orders issued by the judge relevant to the release of information, especially
"gag orders."

Avoid any adversarial role with anyone involved in the case.

Coordinate posttrial media activities with the prosecuting attorney and the victim.

Prepare the victim for potential media inquiries on anniversaries of crimes or court
decisions.

Significant Issues for the Media and the Courts

At the National Conference of the Media and the Courts sponsored by The National Judicial
College in 1996, ten key issues affecting judges, lawyers, and reporters were identified, many
of which affect victims and those who serve them:

1. Encourage and establish continuing interdisciplinary educational opportunities and
dialogue among judges, journalists, and lawyers to foster an understanding of each other's
roles through journalism schools, law schools, and The National Judicial College.

2. Assume there is access to all court proceedings and records and place the burden of proof
for closure on the entity seeking secrecy. Privacy issues may overcome the presumption
in appropriate cases.

3. Refrain from imposing gag orders on the news media or attorneys. Courts should seek
other remedies in lieu of gag orders except in extraordinary cases.

4. Establish and/or support bench/bar/media committees that will meet regularly in every
community to address issues of mutual concern.

6. Consider professional standards for journalists that are nonbinding.

7. Assume that cameras will be allowed in the courtroom, including the federal court system,
and that such access should be limited or excluded only for strong reasons.

8. Encourage judges to explain, on the record, the reasons for their rulings.

9. Determine when and if it is appropriate to compel reporters to testify or produce notes,
tapes, etc., understanding that the media cannot serve as an arm of law enforcement.

10. Encourage media organizations to develop an ombudsman system to hear
recommendations from the courts and the public wherever feasible.

The Media Perspective of Crime and Victimization

Over the past decade, news media professionals have begun to examine their roles in the
coverage of crime and victimization. The "double-edged sword," involving the victim's right
to privacy versus the public's right to know, has been debated among journalists, with such
discussions often involving input and advice from victim service providers. While levels of
sensitivity to victims' rights and needs continue to vary among journalists, news media today,
more than ever, are adhering to basic principles of fairness and sensitivity that ultimately
benefit victims of crime whose cases they cover.

GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR THE JOURNALIST

There are three guiding principles for journalists that are particularly applicable to their
coverage of crime and victimization (Black, Steele, and Barney 1995).

1. Seek truth and report it as fully as possible.

Inform yourself continuously so you in turn can inform, engage, and educate the public
in a clear and compelling way on significant issues.

Be honest, fair, and courageous in gathering, reporting, and interpreting accurate
information.

Give voice to the voiceless.

Hold the powerful accountable.

2. Act independently.

Guard vigorously the essential stewardship role a free press plays in an open society.

Seek out and disseminate competing perspectives without being unduly influenced by
those who would use their power or position to counter the public interest.

Remain free of associations and activities that may compromise your integrity or
damage your credibility.

Treat sources, subjects, and colleagues as human beings deserving of respect, not
merely as means to your journalistic ends.

Recognize that gathering and reporting information may cause harm or discomfort but
balance those negatives by choosing alternatives that maximize your goal of truth
telling.

A MEDIA CODE OF ETHICS

Victim service providers should encourage media professionals, both print and broadcast, to
adopt a code of ethics specific to their coverage of crime and victimization. Such a code can
serve as a basic ethical foundation from which difficult decisions can be made, frequently
within very short time periods.

The most comprehensive written policy on ethical considerations affecting journalists,
including those affecting crime victims, was developed by the St. Louis Post-Dispatch in 1992.
In the sensitive introduction to its "Guidelines on Privacy Issues," the following guiding
statement was made:

As we consider the policies that will best serve the Post-Dispatch, we should bear in mind some broad
principles:

The perceptions and perspectives of reporters and editors on the one hand, and readers and other
members of the public on the other, are different. The news professionals are motivated chiefly by a
desire to get the news and publish it. The others are more likely to react personally, imagining how they
would feel as the subject of a story. In weighing matters of privacy, perhaps some effort should be made
to bring that personal perspective into the equation.

Major changes should be approached with caution. The wind may seem to be blowing very strongly in
one direction today, but could shift direction tomorrow.

No policy will cover every eventuality. The policy here enunciated (in the Guidelines on Privacy Issues)
includes many exceptions, and must be augmented by the constant application of fairness, common sense,
reasoned judgment, and a degree of compassion by reporters and editors all along the line.

When victim advocates consider proposing a code of ethics to media professionals, the
following issues should be seriously considered.

The news media should--

Present details about a crime in a fair, objective, and balanced manner.

Recognize the importance of publishing or broadcasting information that can contribute to
public safety and, at the same time, balance this need with the victim's need for privacy.

Respect the privacy of individuals who choose to refrain from dealing with the media or
who choose to address the media through a spokesperson of their choice.

Provide a balanced perspective relevant to a criminal act that reflects the concerns of the
victim and offender.

Never report rumors or innuendoes about the victim, the offender, or the crime unless such
information has been verified by reliable sources.

In crimes other than homicide, identify the victim by age and area where the crime occurs,
omitting street addresses and block numbers.

Refrain from using information gained from private conversations of victims or their
relatives who are in shock or distraught.

Identify witnesses only when they volunteer to be named, and when there is clearly no
danger that can be predicted through their identification by the media.

Never publish the identity of a sexual assault victim without his or her prior consent,
regardless of whether the case is in the criminal or civil courts.

Never publish the identity of a child victim.

Never identify alleged or convicted incest offenders when such actions could lead to the
identification of the victim.

In cases of kidnapping where it is determined that the victim has been sexually assaulted,
stop identifying the victim by name once a sexual assault has been alleged.

Never identify the names of victims of scams or other crimes that tend to humiliate or
degrade the victim without the victim's prior consent.

Never publish photographs or broadcast images of funerals without the surviving family
members' prior consent.

Refer to drunk driving incidents as "crashes" or "crimes," not accidents, regardless of
whether or not the use of alcohol has been determined as a factor.

Approach the coverage of all stories related to crime and victimization in a manner that is
not lurid, sensational, or intrusive to the victim and his or her family.

Promising Practices

In many jurisdictions, victim advocates provide training to journalists and journalism
students about news media coverage of crime and victimization, utilizing this chapter as a
resource for education. Often, victims participate in these programs in order to focus
attention on the reality of victimization, their personal experiences with the news media, and
how news media coverage can increase victim trauma.

"Bench-bar-press" committees in many communities meet regularly to discuss past and
pending criminal cases and related news media coverage. Participants include judges,
defense attorneys, prosecutors, victim advocates, and journalists who collaborate on how to
secure accurate, timely coverage of crime and victimization that is sensitive to both victims
and the community.

Panel presentations involving justice officials, victim service providers, and news media
representatives can be sponsored to address the issues in this chapter. For example, in
1999, Washburn University in Topeka, Kansas, sponsored a forum on the news media
impact on justice policy, which resulted in an agreement among panel members to regularly
meet and discuss issues of mutual concern.

Victim advocates can offer debriefings and supportive services to journalists who cover
crime and victimization to help them cope with vicarious trauma that might result from their
jobs.

Many journalism associations and news media outlets have developed codes of ethics to
guide not only journalistic practices but also specifically the coverage of crime and
victimization.

The News Media's Coverage of

Crime and VictimizationSelf-Examination

1. What is the Colorado/Oklahoma Resource Council media consortium?

2. Describe three of the major concerns that crime victims might have about dealing with the
news media?

3. Describe three of the nineteen guidelines for victims who choose to deal with the news
media.

4. What are two of the roles and responsibilities of victim advocates in helping victims deal
with the news media?

Fritz, K. L. 1992. Television News Coverage of Tragic Death and the Grieving: Does it Affect
the Bereavement Process of the Survivor? Macomb, IL: Western Illinois University,
Department of Communications Arts and Sciences.

Horton, J., and J. Zimmer. 1994. Media Violence and Children: A Guide for Parents.
Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.

Hughes, K. W. 1990. "Florida Star v. B. J. F.: Can the State Regulate the Press in the Interest
of Protecting the Privacy of Rape Victims?" Mercer Law Review.

Kilpatrick, D., C. Edmunds, and A. Seymour. 1992. "Rape in America: A Report to the
Nation." The National Women's Study. Charleston, SC: Medical University of South
Carolina National Crime Victims Research Treatment Center; Arlington, VA: National
Center for Victims of Crime.